Herman Cain. This is who I support. I will write his name on the ballot if I have to.
Remember he is the one who told clinton that the numbers on the hillary care didn't add up. Even better is that if obama starts tanking, the are going to pull out the racist card should he be up against a white guy. no option of that with Cain. He has a proven record of hard work ethic and accountability.

Observations;
Perry went down in my book.
Paul is not electable.
Newt stays to the point and won't get caught in the in fighting.
Herman is good.
Huntsman moved up quite a bit.
Too many questions went to Mitt and not the others.

__________________
GLFWDA member since 1979.
Member Southern Michigan Rock Crawlers.

Observations;
Perry went down in my book.
Paul is not electable.
Newt stays to the point and won't get caught in the in fighting.
Herman is good.
Huntsman moved up quite a bit.
Too many questions went to Mitt and not the others.

Agreed.

The media (while taking every effort to portray the Tea Partiers as a buch of "Larry the Cable Guy" clones) definitely wanted it to be Mitt vs Perry.

Paul has a lot of good ideas, but also reveals his true colors as a nutjob. IF elected (a damn longshot) he wouldn't get anything done because Congress would block virtually everthing. He's an idealist with a track record of not working and playing well with others, a recipe for gridlock.

Perry is 100% career politician and will adopt whatever "character" and position will get him elected to the next office. You don't get to be a staffer/booster for Clinton & Gore and then run for President as a staunch conservative.

Agree on Paul. -10
There were several small statements by Perry I didn't like, nor did I like some of his body language reactions. When others were poking at him, he had a smirk on his face as if they were talking to a teenage child who doesn't want to listen. -5
Newt is probably the best candidate but is too honest. Hence, his baggage. +1
Cain was probably the #2 winner in my book. +1
Bachman beat the vaccine dead horse waaaaay too long. Shows that she can get too emotional.-1
Huntsman made zero errors.+10
Neither did the other guy but I forgot his name. LOL 0
Mitt stayed strong. +1

__________________
GLFWDA member since 1979.
Member Southern Michigan Rock Crawlers.

Too bad Huntsman isn't more like his father. He's to left for me.
Bachman is a nutcase, as I have said before.
Newt is a brilliant guy but has too much baggage for the press to get over.
Paul, not going to happen.
Perry is a moron, as mentioned before.
Romney is a phony jackass.
Cain, I really like him but not electable.

I just can't believe this is the best we can come up with. This election is a slam dunk for the right, but you still need a solid guy and I don't have much faith in any of them.

Cain is definitely electable he just needs more attention. whoever runs needs to have him as VP at the very least. because he is not a career politician the media lacks coverage on him. the media doesn't want to show real world answers on their broadcasts. after a previous debate CNN had cain on against sharpton and a bunch of other lefties, they couldn't get him off the air quick enough.

I don't think we deserved it. No one really deserves something like that.

But I believe something like that was inevitable. We get involved in every single conflict of interests all over the world and try to do the right thing, ie. what we believe in, while we sit on our "island" and watch the moving pictures show the chaos.

That combined with our cocky, #1 in the world, bad ass attitude were going to spell disaster at some point.

All it took was someone small enough to fly under the radar, but big enough to be well supplied to cause massive initial damage and continual mind fukc a decade later

I think if we worked harder on fixing our problems and leading by example instead of forcing democracy down everyone's throats we would be a hell of a lot farther ahead.

I am not up to speed yet on everyone who may be running, but I like Ron Paul. He seems to be one of the only ones with out an agenda. Lets reduce the size of the government and get the economy back on track. Yes he may be a little querky but WGAF? Time for some major changes and he would bring them. It is a long shot I know, but.....

I'm still waitng for someone, anyone, to explain to me exactly what makes Ron Paul a nut job.

While eliminating the Dept of Education, Dept of Energy, etc... makes great campaign rhetoric, it's not that easy.

Blind, literal and unthinking "verbatim complaince" fundamentalism with the Constitution is just as bad an idea as Biblical (or Islamic) fundametalism. I agree that we need to "get back to basics: using the Constitution as our specification and thoughtfully eliminate/reduce/repurpose many parts of our government.

And while I think we need to get a lot more defensive of our own economy/industries/markets and rework a lot of really bad "one way" (generally against us) trade policies and agreements, full-on isolationism isn't the answer either. And we can't just "cut and run" from "illegal" wars - while we need to get out sooner rather than later, it has to be done right.

And look at Paul's record: his inflexible, idealism results in his getting little done. As POTUS, he would generate such gridlock and paralysis that it would make Obie's first couple of years (with an extremely friendly House & Senate nonetheless) look like a master statesman.

So, while he's a great reminder of how we need to start doing things, he's too extreme to actually get anything done - hence "nutjob"...